TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

Discussion in 'Tesla Motors' started by Ingineer, Dec 15, 2016.

  1. Ingineer

    Ingineer Electrical Engineer

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,448
    I've been staying out of this until now, but I would like to point out that wk057's information from the BMS is correct. Each car's BMS is constantly calculating it's real capacity and it's visible right there in the diagnostic screen.

    This is also why Tesla does not (willingly) give us access to this information.

    Also, if you compare packs across the cars, you quickly see that none of them have identical capacity. Due to manufacturing tolerances, each of the cells ends up with slightly more or less amp-hour capacities. Due to the intelligent design of the packs this generally averages out pretty nicely, so the actual difference in practice is small, and quickly is lost in the noise of how the pack is treated under use. However, if owners had access to this data, people would be constantly up in arms when comparing cars. It's also true that as time goes on the cells being manufactured get better and have more capacity. So an early "90" pack usually had noticeably less capacity when new than it's more recently manufactured versions. It doesn't feel good when you find out you got one of the "duds".

    On top of all this they are also introducing other things most people have no idea about, for instance the newer versions of some packs have significantly more output current capability than earlier ones. This has a great impact on performance. Tesla doesn't tell us about this.

    They are also taking away output current after too many launches on some packs. So if you do too many launches, you may suddenly find your car's performance reduced, with no indication from the car or Tesla, and no advance notice that this could happen. This is shady dishonest behavior in my opinion.

    Don't ask me for specific data, I'm not going to give it. I just want to point out that I Love Tesla, and support their mission, but I think this is not the right way to do things. It's fine if they want to impose a launch limit, but they need to INFORM owners of this!

    I also believe it's fine to round the numbers on capacity a bit, as well as have the bottom discharge buffer. Most ICE cars don't let you use all the fuel in the tank either, they mount the intake tube off the bottom a bit to avoid sucking in the sediment that ends up there. Totally OK. What's not ok is using this "fudge factor" for marketing wank. They should have been consistent with the software limited 60. Also, they should call the models "65, 75, 90, etc" but leave off the kWh designation. In the official specs, maybe in fine print, state the approximate usable kWh for those of us that expect numbers not to lie. Right there on the front of all packs is a label proudly stating a kWh capacity value that it can never achieve.

    Tesla has some amazing engineering and has managed to succeed against crazy odds. Trust is already thin though. It would be an awesome change for a large company to buck the trend and start being honest with it's customers and begin building an organization we can all TRUST. The value of that in the future will be worth billions. Stop with the dishonest fabricated stats, stop permitting employees in the service centers from lying to customers. INTEGRITY will be a welcome change. Instead I am saddened to see all the Tesla has built thus far slowly sliding down in to the slimy muck territory that we experience while owning other brands. Tesla's ownership experience has convinced me to avoid doing business with them in the future (unless something changes). I love the cars, and own/have owned quite a few, but I am now only buying them salvage after Tesla has disowned them. I have only ever purchased one new from Tesla, and it was such a poor experience overall, I don't think I will consider it ever again until they clean up their act.

    I believe the success of Tesla's mission is in jeopardy if they don't make some changes now. It would be sad to see all this come crumbling down.

    Fix customer communication.
    Fix the service experience.
    Make service software, information, and parts available to all owners.

    A true mass market success depends on this!
     
    • x 55
    • x 14
    • x 7
    • x 3
    • x 1
  2. Canuck

    Canuck Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2013
    Messages:
    4,408
    Location:
    South Surrey, BC
    Call me cynical, but I fully expected we would see this as Tesla gained traction and became more mainstream. To me, it's inevitable.
     
    • Like x 1
  3. Andyw2100

    Andyw2100 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    6,535
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY
    Excellent post, Ingineer!

    This is the most disturbing information I've seen in this thread. Though I don't launch a heck of a lot, I know there are many that do. I don't think any of us (without access to the internal data or access to internal company information) would have even considered that possibility.

    While I agree this is shady practice and dishonest behavior, I'm not sure Tesla warning people at this point would do a heck of a lot to make that any better with respect to current owners. (They could clearly make it better for potential owners, as the potential owners would then know what they are purchasing.) For those of us who already own the cars, this is another example of selling us one thing (a car with unlimited launches) and delivering something else entirely!


    I'm not asking for specific data with respect to number of launches, etc., but are you able to share which packs and models are limited the most, or is that also too specific information? Or does the pack model and build date (early, late, etc.) not matter? Above you had written "on some packs", which is why I ask. You could have meant "some packs, owned by people who launch a lot", or you could have meant "some packs, like all the 85s, early 90s, Ludicrous upgraded 85s, etc.)

    I'm definitely not asking you to share anything you're not comfortable sharing. Just asking for a little clarification, and any additional info you can provide.

    Thanks!
     
    • Like x 1
  4. qwk

    qwk Model S P2681

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    2,829
    Exactly. Car is worth owning, company is definitely not worth messing with. That's why the demand sucks until they pull another demand lever. Unfortunately there are only so many demand levers.

    Unless something changes drastically, they are going to forever remain a niche manufacturer.
     
    • Like x 4
  5. lolachampcar

    lolachampcar Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Messages:
    4,688
    Location:
    WPB Florida
    and I can not overemphasize that most (apart from maybe the launch limit) of this crap buys Tesla ZERO or very near zero. There simply is no reason to do things like adding KW-Hr to terms that are obviously simple model numbers.
     
    • Like x 3
    • Love x 1
  6. apacheguy

    apacheguy Sig 255, VIN 320

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    4,005
    Location:
    So Cal
    @Ingineer - WRT reducing launch current, are you referring to the DU overheating? Sometimes in my non P 85 I see the dashed limiter line appear on the power gauge after doing a few consecutive launches.
     
  7. Mjølner

    Mjølner Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2015
    Messages:
    72
    Location:
    Midgard (Norway)
    Quite easy, if I had my 85 kWh instead of 77,8 I would have more range wouldn`t I?
     
    • Like x 1
    • Disagree x 1
  8. Muzzman1

    Muzzman1 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2014
    Messages:
    199
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    If possible @Ingeineer can you chime in over here:
    This is only for owners that care about launching their cars | Tesla Motors
     
  9. Andyw2100

    Andyw2100 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    6,535
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY
    Why link to a post that is on a different site? That thread started by linking back to Ingineer's post here. This issue probably warrants its own thread, but it should be here, on TMC, not on the Tesla-run site.

    Edit: Just noticed that it was lolachampcar, whom I respect greatly, that started the thread on the Tesla site. I'm guessing he must have had his reasons for doing this, so...
     
    • Like x 1
    • Funny x 1
  10. AWDtsla

    AWDtsla Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    Messages:
    2,582
    Location:
    NE
    So total launches on a physical pack, not just simple thermal protection? Sweeeeeet.
     
  11. lolachampcar

    lolachampcar Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Messages:
    4,688
    Location:
    WPB Florida
    Andy,

    I cross post interesting stuff from here to there every now and then. There are some on TM that seldom if ever visit TMC. I read Muzz's post as an invite for Ing to chime in on TM if he was interested.

    No offense meant.
     
    • Like x 2
  12. AWDtsla

    AWDtsla Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    Messages:
    2,582
    Location:
    NE
    Details on the launch limitation would be appreciated. If it's a pack problem I doubt it's launches but time spent at max amps. I don't launch that often, but I do often hit max amps.
     
  13. lolachampcar

    lolachampcar Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Messages:
    4,688
    Location:
    WPB Florida
    If it is max amps, I too am in its sights. I really do not launch much but full throttle is almost a daily occurrence.

    It may be time to bring back the data logger :)
     
    • Like x 3
  14. Andyw2100

    Andyw2100 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    6,535
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY
    No problem! (Please see my edit above, if you hadn't already.)

    My only concern is that now I have to check both sites! :)
     
  15. apacheguy

    apacheguy Sig 255, VIN 320

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    4,005
    Location:
    So Cal
    I don't think we know this yet. My interpretation was that this is a temporary limitation affecting consecutive launches.
     
  16. Andyw2100

    Andyw2100 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    6,535
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY
    Actually I inferred, from what ingineer wrote, that it was a limitation on the total number of launches on the pack.

    He indicated that there was no notification from Tesla about the limitation. The temporary limiting is shown on the display.

    Also, the language he used talking about it being shady, etc. was relatively strong language. I don't think temporary and clearly necessary limitations would have evoked such strong language from ingineer.
     
    • Like x 1
    • Disagree x 1
  17. Ingineer

    Ingineer Electrical Engineer

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,448
    It is a literal counter. It's not related to thermals. I don't (yet) have any exact data on which packs have the counter enabled and what increments it. Tesla has literally told owners that complain that it's put in to "protect driveline components". This would be acceptable only IF THEY DISCLOSED IT up front! On top of this, they have also stated that upgrading to a P100DL will remove this limitation. Hmm....
     
    • Informative x 14
    • Like x 3
    • Disagree x 1
    • Love x 1
  18. MP3Mike

    MP3Mike Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2016
    Messages:
    2,293
    Location:
    Oregon
    @Ingineer So what happens when you hit this mysterious limit? (Can you no longer launch? Is launch power limited to 400kW? Is power limited in a take-over attempt at highway speeds?)

    To be clear is it a x launches in y minutes limit, or is it a z number of launches ever limit?
     
  19. Saghost

    Saghost Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,616
    Location:
    Delaware
    Interesting. If it's protecting driveline components, and the P100DL doesn't have it, I wonder what they changed about the powertrain in the P100DLs?

    Prior to this I assumed it was just a P90D with a bigger pack of different design (including the active Ludicrous capable fuse, of course.)
     
  20. jeffro01

    jeffro01 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,343
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    No, what's shady and dishonest is to make a claim like this and then immediately state you're not going to back it up. I absolutely and completely call BS on this claim. If you're going to openly slander Tesla then have the guts to back it up.

    This is absurd...

    Jeff
     
    • Disagree x 15
    • Like x 6

Share This Page